tv [untitled] January 25, 2011 9:00pm-9:30pm PST
mr. president, all members are present. supervisor chiu: thank you. ladies and gentlemen, could you please join me in the pledge of allegiance? >> i pledge allegiance to the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. supervisor chiu: madam clerk, are there any communications? >> i have no communications, mr. president. supervisor chiu: given there are no it's not -- no items on the consent agenda, what do we move to our first item? >> item 1 is an ordinance
amending the san francisco environment code to require any person who produces a drug offered for sale in san francisco to participate in approved drug store should program for the collection and disposal of unwanted drugs from residential sources. supervisor mirkarimi: i want to quickly align with this legislation strives to do and the reason is so importuned -- so important that the city and county adopt this. i wanted to help stop the contamination by the improper disposal of pharmaceuticals and medications. i want to help seniors avoid potentially dangerous medication dosage errors, which according to federal statistics, is significantly on the rise, and one of the leading causes of teenage drug abuse and suicide is access to these medications that are easy to obtain and not
properly disposed of. and, of course, we want to help or prevent recreational -- help reduce or prevent recreational pharmaceutical use. so i thought that we would take stock in what other states have attempted to do, and that is create what we would think is a common-sense take that drugs disposal program. 10 states in the united states have been tempted -- have attempted to do exactly that, and those exact same 10 states, the pharmaceutical industry, the lobbyists from washington did a very effective job in parachuting into the legislatures and blunting those 10 states from adopting the same kind of legislation, including california, so why should we retreat from our position? they need is still there. demand is certainly well known, but municipal government and state government are left twisting in the wind trying to
figure out a solution or remedy for this particular dilemma. the solution or remedy is not far from us. could you please put it on the screen for me? a little higher. san mateo county had these disposal receptacles throw out the whole area of san retail county. it is simple. they got this done in 2006 where these two versions of what they're receptacles are was exactly what they were able to effectuate the last four years. it is in sight. it is outside. the facility, called -- particular police stations of where the receptacles are, and anybody can come by and simply dispose of the stuff right there. simple fact without political partisanship, no fraud to the bulk pharmaceutical industry. nobody has to say they are for or against the legislation.
-- no affront to the pharmaceutical industry. every police department in san mateo county is part of the pharmaceutical take that program. every single-represented in san mateo county. next slide please. the government had awarded san mateo county and award, california's top environmental award for their pharmaceutical disposal program. thank you. i appreciate it. for the last two months, what we have known is that industry lobbyists from sacramento and washington have been imbedded here in city hall, whether one wants to admit it or not, and try to make sure that san francisco did not become a beachhead of insisting the pharmaceutical industry take share responsibility in helping us figure out a disposable and sensible take back -- disposal and sensible take back program. the difference between san mateo
county and san francisco is san mateo county pays for it. i'm saying san francisco should not. it is time that corporate responsibility be compelled and everything we possibly can in order to alleviate from the burden of having to refer to our general fund. i have also tried to work with both this administration and merely -- tried to work with both the newsom and lee administrations. unless the city is willing to stand up with the forecast as probable legislation if we enact this legislation, that makes people a little concerned that this is not something we can support. i get that. so i just e-mailed the office of the mayor. i appreciate the conversation i have had with him and his staff. we agreed together that what we will do is create a trial program for one year.
it will be considerably more robust than the one that has been expressed before. there has been a miniature trial program in san francisco with 10 independent pharmacies that are willing to set up a disposal receptacle program. the reason why it is independent pharmacies is because safeway and walgreen's will not play ball, and yet, they constitute the greatest majority of those retail outlets, point of purchase, where consumers are buying their drugs, but they will not really help us take them back. so i'm insisting that we increase the radius of the trial program, that we do so at a cost that i do not think should be shouldered by the city and county of san francisco or the taxpayers, and that the administration has agreed that they will do everything they can to double the size approximately of what an interim program and evaluate what that should be.
in light of that, i feel confident this will be an effective trial. i look forward to next year when federal legislation requiring states to do more than a mandatory program. i'm asking we send the legislation back to committee and we will go into the process of what the full trial will look at. thank you. i also want to thank the mayor's staff and the department of environment and my staff for their work on this legislation. has been a bit of a seesaw as we have been negotiating with the pharmaceutical industry. i want to thank those who came to the table. tip of the was significant representatives -- california health institute that represents nearly 50 manufacturers are the pharmaceutical industry, and pharma, which represents about 45 to 50 -- two significant representatives.
supervisor chiu: supervisor mirkarimi made a motion to refer this fact to committee. can we do that without objection? without objection, this item will be referred back to the public safety committee. we can now move to item two. >> board of its establishing a special fund to receive donations and authorize expenditures for the purpose of holding events to promote the opening of the newly renovated terminal to of the san francisco international airport. supervisor chiu: colleagues, roll call vote? >> chiu aye. chu aye. cohen aye. elsbernd aye. farrell aye. kim aye. mar aye. mirkarimi aye.
there are 11 ayes. supervisor chiu: the ordinances passed on the first reading. item three. >> item 3 is an ordinance authorizing the mayor's office to reward john doe $10,000 for providing information that led to the arrest of a criminal defendant. supervisor chiu: without objection, the ordinances passed on first reading. >> item 4, resolution authorizing the department of public works to accept and expend $11,553,000 awarded through the metropolitan transportation commission's congestion management agency block grant program. supervisor chiu: this resolution is adopted. next item. >> item 5, resolution approving three bicycle facility program grant of movements with contract terms of more than 10 years. supervisor chiu: same house,
same call? this resolution is adopted. >> item 6, resolution approving a contract for the replacement air traffic control tower/terminal in an approximate amount of $11.7 million and a contingency budget of approximately $1.6 million for airports and faa requested changes. supervisor chiu: resolution is adopted. next item. >> item 7, resolution approving the international terminal museum/gallery store lease. supervisor chiu: resolution is adopted. >> item 8, resolution approving and authorizing an agreement for the purchase of a permanent access road easement. supervisor chiu: same house, same call? the resolution is adopted. >> item 9, resolution authorizing the master lease of the hotel at 73080 street for the department of public health.
supervisor chiu: the resolution is adopted. >> and 10, resolution authorizing the parma of the environment to retroactively accept and expend a grant in the amount of 7 $5,463 to implement a pilot project that will lead to the creation of multi- lingual green cleaning guidelines. item 11 is a resolution receiving an approving the film more jazz community benefit district annual reports to the city for fiscal years 2007, 2008, and 2009, which also includes the district proposed budget for fiscal year 2010. supervisor chiu: this resolution is adopted. >> item 12 is a resolution authorizing the lessons of space and services at united layer at 200 hall street for the department of technology. supervisor chiu: same house, same call? this resolution is adopted. item 13. >> item 13 is a resolution authorizing the license of space and services telx @ 200 paul
street for the department of technology. supervisor chiu: same house, call? the resolution is adopted. why don't we move to our committee reports starting at item 18. >> items 18 through 22 were considered by the rules committee at a special meeting on thursday january 20, 2011, and were forwarded to the board as committee reports. item 18 is a motion approving the mayor's nomination of reappointment of andrew wolfram to the historic preservation commission seat number two for a four-year term ending december 31, 2014. supervisor chiu: the resolution is approved. >> item 19 is approving the mayor's nomination for the appointment of richard john's to the historic preservation seat number four for a four-year term ending december 31, 2014. supervisor chiu: colleagues, any
discussion? supervisor avalos. supervisor avalos: i actually will be voting against the appointment of richard johns essentially on the qualifications for membership on the historic preservation committee. i believe, according to the charter, it seems pretty clear that a real historian is what is needed for that one seat, and i do not believe that, according to what i have seen, richard johns meets those qualifications. i believe you could stretch the language for the charter to indicate that he could take the seat, but i think when it comes down to the spirit of the charter amendment establishing the historic preservation commission, that we would want to put the best that we can in that seat, a historian who meets the standards that are in place in the legislation and the standards that are called for, which include someone who is
seen as a historian recognized by the secretary of the interior for his professional qualifications for history or has had a real body of work that shows they have made contributions to academia or a body of work that would show he has expertise in the field he is going into in terms of historical preservation. that is not the case with richard johns, so i would like to recommend that we reject his appointment to the commission. actually, i really -- my position has evolved over the past couple of weeks. as of last wednesday, i really went back and forth. i received a lot of information to accept the nomination, to reject the nomination, and i consulted with a member of the rules committee saying what my
position was. it was pretty noncommittal, but it was not until over the weekend that i saw what was needed for qualifications and i wanted to make sure we were putting someone who had the most qualifications in that spot, so that is why i became even more involved to actually come out against the appointment, so i hope you can join me in that vote. thank you. supervisor campos: thank you, mr. president. until recently, i was the chair of rules and had an opportunity to listen to this individual, and i know there was a subsequent hearing at the rules committee. in this business, you have to call it as you see it. i have to say that to the extent there has been criticism of this of viacom where i disagree with some of the criticism is that i do not believe that the issue of whether or not this person needs the qualifications is as clear cut as some have made it out to be. i do think, from my reading of
the language that was passed by the voters, that there is a reasonable argument to be made that this individual needs the threshold qualifications, and i said that in committee because i believe that i think that the reading of the language can go either way. that said, the question of whether or not someone meets the threshold qualifications is only part of the equation. i think that even if the case can be made that this individual does, which i think that case can be made, there is a case of whether or not on balance the appointment makes sense, and having listened to what the individual indicated -- and by the way, mr. johns is a very reputable person, who i think should be committed for wanting to serve san francisco. on balance, i think there can be better appointments that can be made, and i was especially struck by the testimony of people in the field who felt
that notwithstanding meeting the basic threshold to the extent you could make that point, the there could be better appointments, and it is for that reason that i will be voting against this nomination, but i do not think that it is as clear-cut as it has been made out to be. but i do think that we have an obligation to give everyone a fair chance, a fair hearing and then decide if on balance it is the right appointment for the city. i think there are enough people who, notwithstanding this individual's experience, can provide a lot more expertise to the city and county, which is why i will be voting against it. thank you. supervisor weiner: i will be supporting the nomination. i agree with supervisor campos that a reasonable argument can be made either way in terms of the qualifications, and fundamentally, it is a judgment
for this board and for the mayor, and i think it is quite reasonable to include that he does meet the qualifications. however, i come out differently on the merits than supervisor campos. the historic preservation commission -- and i supported the creation of the commission -- it has become an increasingly powerful and important commission, reaching into a lot of different areas of policy in this city. not just housing, but now recently reaching into parks and potentially libraries and other areas. it is important to have a diversity of backgrounds and viewpoints on the committee, and -- on the commission, and if we are going to have a commission made up exclusively of advocates for historic preservation, only advocates, that is a problem.
i will be speaking to that in more detail later in the meeting during introductions, but i think this is a very appropriate and good nomination, and i will be supporting it. supervisor mar: i think there was a thorough discussion, and i think it became very clear that there were passionate people on both sides advocating for and against mr. johns and i wanted to acknowledge his strong work as an attorney and also a community leader as well. from my perspective, a number of community advocates and preservationists made clear points that seat number four should be an historic meeting the secretary of interior with demonstrable experience in north america or bay area history. another candidate had come
forward at that meeting as well, a historian from san francisco state, and it was clear that there were many other people that more clearly meet those qualifications, so i will be voting against mr. johns, in favor of having a stronger historian on the commission as well. supervisor chiu: colleagues, for the discussion? if we could take a roll-call vote on the motion. >> chiu no. chu aye. cohen aye. elsbernd aye. farrell aye. kim aye. mar no. mirkarimi no. weiner aye. avalos no. campos no. there are 6 ayes and 5 no. supervisor chiu: of the motion is approved. item 20. >> item 20 is a motion approving
the mayor's nomination for reappointment of karl hasz. chiu aye. chu aye. cohen aye. elsbernd aye. farrell aye. kim aye. mar aye. mirkarimi aye. weiner aye. avalos aye. campos aye. there are 11 ayes. supervisor chiu: the motion is approved. >> item 21 is a motion confirming appointments and harry kim and herb cohn. supervisor chiu: this resolution
is adopted. >> item 22 is a resolution confirming the appointment of florence kong to the city hall preservation advisory commission. supervisor chiu: the resolution is adopted. >> item 23, resolution determining that the issuance of a tight 75 on sale general approval of liquor license to the unicorn pan-asian restaurant will serve the public convenience or necessity. supervisor chiu: the resolution is approved. >> item 24 is a resolution determining that the issuance of a tight 51 beer and wine club license to golden gate council of american youth hostels inc. will serve the public convenience. item 25 is a resolution authorizing the the poorman of public health to except and it's been a retroactive way -- the department of public health to accept and expend retroactively
a grant in the amount of $402,596 from the university of california sanford's is good for debate in a program entitled integrating hiv and geriatric for people living with hiv 50 and older. supervisor chiu: same house, same call? resolution is adopted. >> item 26 is a resolution authorizing the san francisco recreation and park apartments to retroactively accept and expend a gift from the sanford cisco parks trust to support various reserve -- recreation and park poorman operations. supervisor chiu: this item is approved. >> item 27 was forwarded to the board as a committee report. the resolution approves and authorizes acceptance of a right of way easement need for a 50- year, exclusive, subsurface easement at no charge from the united states department of the interior for the purpose of constructing the water system
improvement program they division pipeline improvement upgrade. supervisor chiu: same house, call? this resolution is adopted. we can now move to roll call. >> president chiu, your first on a roll call for introductions. supervisor chiu: i have three items today, first on the subject of business tax reform. i would like to help restart our city's efforts to reform our proven business tax system, which, as many of you know, has discouraged job creation and makes us less competitive. the problem is simple -- san francisco is the only city in the state of california that relies entirely on a payroll tax for its business tax. the payroll tax has been a job killer. it discourages job creation, excludes some of our largest and most profitable institutions such as banks and financial service providers. with only 10% paying the payroll
tax, it narrows the tax base when it should be broadened. the solution, as we know, is a bit more complicated. last spring, after working extensively with the mayor's office, say economists, and business and labor leaders, i proposed a more progressive payroll tax system with replacement revenue from the reduction coming from a new tax on commercial rand, which is common to many california cities. according to our economist, the proposal would have created jobs while adding revenue to support by two city services. as some of you remember, i decided last summer not to move forward to place this plan on the ballot. instead, many of us supported an increase on a high in real estate transfer tax proposed by supervisor avalos, and thankfully, that was approved by voters last november. i think we need to think bigger. we have to consider eliminating
the payroll tax entirely and replacing it with a gross receipts tax, not just in commercial rent, but in all industries. the goal of business tax reforms remain the same -- we want to create jobs, create a fair business tax, and increase revenue by broadening our tax base. i'm sure in the coming months, we will have robust discussions. i look forward to working again soon with our city partners, including our new mayor, the office of economic and workforce development, our treasurer, city attorney, office of small business. at this time, and specifically asking our city attorney to draft legislation. many of our colleagues have highlighted the issue as a central part of what we all hope to get done. i want to thank supervisor weiner for his interest in the issue as well as supervisor farrell who spoke about payroll
tax on his first day in office. we need business tax reform to improve our economy and create jobs, and i look forward to working with all of you on this effort. the second item i am introducing today is an ordinance that would reauthorize the real estate watchdog program. in 2006, the creation of a real- estate watchdog program, which allows our assessor to give a reward to anyone who provides information that leads to the detection of underpayment and property tax owed to the city and county of san francisco. over the last few years, the real-estate watchdog program has been a success. we have seen dozens of claims initiated by the public, several of which were eligible for rewards. at this time, the program has resulted in a net increase of almost $1.2 million in new property taxes collected by the city with total reward payments of close to $60,000. the ordinance i am introducing